Question for the British: What is the role and point of your king/queen in modern society?

Question

I'm American, so I don't understand what the King or Queen does anymore. Does the royal family have any power to do anything? If so, why? It seems to me that the democracy experienced would be an illusion if they have the final say no matter what.

And if they don't have any power, why are they still treated like world leaders? I've heard some British tax money goes to the royal family so they can keep being rich. But why is that if they are no longer a critical part of the government that people care about her as much as they do, and are willing to pay tax money for her.

I am not being rude or cynical, but I do not understand the Royal Family's role and purpose in the 21st century.

Answer 1

A complete answer would be too long, so I'll just make one obvious point.

A liberal democracy under a constitutional monarchy makes for stability and consensus. I'm not unduly bothered about the theory: I rest on the facts.

Compare the histories of republics with a ruling president, countries with an active, ruling hereditary monarch, and with constitutional monarchies. Which would most people rather live in? French politics is a mess; the only country in modern Europe where the National Front came within a whisker of power. The USA lives in a perpetual fever of electioneering, with the result that their politics is a collection of fictions and half-truths (from all parties). Russia? Germany? Italy? China?

Point made.

In contrast, the Spanish have gone a long way to stabilising their politics since they adopted monarchy. They even look like surviving Zapatero, who is hard at work reopening old wounds and trying to destabilise the post-war settlement. Holland, Denmark etc. are also places where stability and a fundamental agreement about politics make for peace and stability.

Basically, an elective short-term autocracy (which is what a presidency is, where it does not amount to dictatorship) gives too much power to one man, and is liable to a radical change of direction too often for sensible government. Again, the fact of a (basically powerless) monarch as head of state limits the ambitions of politicians, which is a good thing.

And anyway, who would make a better head of state than Elizabeth II? Brown? Blair? The example of the USA is not heartening. I'd settle for the Queen over Clinton (either of them) or Bush (either of them) any day.

Answer 2

i am english and i don,t understand either we just keep em rich it makes me sick

Answer 3

The Royal Family are a figurehead and as a result many British people still cherish and respect them.

The Queen is the Head of the Church of England, so is a moral guide to her people.

The Royal Family also generate literally millions of pounds every year for the British economy. Prince Andrew and the Princess Royal in particular work very hard to promote British interests. Many oversees governments with a traditional worldview treat the Royals with great respect and are more open to persuasion from a prince rather than a delegate.

And if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Answer 4

They are still amazingly linked into the legal and parliamentary system. No law becomes enacted unless signed by the king/Queen. After an election the new priminister has to go to the Queen and ask fro permission to form a government. The Queen is still head of the house of lords which is above the house of Commons where the priminister sits in terms of Power.

Without the Queen we would be a republic which is more prone to revolutions.

Having said that the money they receive from the public is a little much at times. That needs to be reviewed. Although it is enough to cover security and living costs which not for fun. They just need to scale it down a little/lot.

Remember the UK is not a true democracy neither are many countries that think they are.

The UK is a monarchy and we are royal subjects not citizens. Whether it is right or wrong who knows. The Priminister gets a whole load of money to himself for living costs too so any leader takes from us.

Answer 5

I would much rather have the Queen as Head of State than President Bush any day.  Governments come and go, but the monarchy is constant.

Answer 6

There is no point to the monarchy in my opinion. Having studied every monarch since the Normans they have only been a hindrance - starting wars, feuding over land and sponging off the population. The present queen complained when the government decided it was high time the royals were taxed! I can't wait to be rid of them I hope the monarchy is abolished before I die. They only have a symbolic role - ceremonies that meant something in years go by  - for example it used to be the case that Parliament had to ask the monarch to assemble but that is a symbolic ceremony now.

I've seen bad deprivation in the nearest town to where I live and when I compare it to the opulence of the lives of the royals it makes me so angry. I believe most people would agree with me when I say that we should make them live the life of a single parent on minimum wage and then see if they moan as much when asked to pay tax which after all goes to providing things free medical care for all in the shape of the NHS. The royals don't know they're born!

Rant over.

Answer 7

They are part of our history and I hope they are always around.  Their role has to change constantly  and has probably made the biggest change in this century.  They are treated like world leaders cos so few countries still have a full monarchy and from watching TV of the state visits there is always a huge turnout to watch them - i think many see it as an honour for royalty to visit.

Each person in the UK pays around 62p per year to upkeep the roayl family - this is cheaper then a small bottle of coco cola or two pints of milk- much better value in my mind.  However the Head of State expenditure is met from public funds, in exchange for the surrender of revenue from the Crown Estate. Parliamentary annuities for Prince Andew, Prince Edward, Princess Anne,The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, The Duke and Duchess of Kent are repaid by The Queen from her private funds.

The Queen, Prince Phillip, Prince Charles and Princess Anne and otherd do an amazing amount of work for the UK  - around 3000 visits per year - They visits schools, hospitals, opening of buildings, businesses and support charities and this offers a bost to those areas in that they feel important.

They hold lots of events which help publicise Britain and a huge amount of our tourism income comes from people wanting to visit royal buildings and they always hope to see royalty.  

The Queens does hundreds of visits through the country and the world and is over 80 - she is amazing!  Imagine having your year planned out for you and having to put public engagements before your own interests - she is so gracious on every visit and shows genuine interest although sometimes she must just want to go home and put her feet up - she can do 5 visits in one day!

I would much prefer to have the Queen as the figurehead of our country then Blair, George Bush, Clinton, or Gordon Brown - they only have their political beliefs and their own gain at the forefront of what they do.  I much prefer to have the Queen and eventually Prince Charles as our head of state - so what if they have family problems - don't we all!

EDIT - Tigger - are you saying every family that does not have a black, chinese or indian person in it is racist  - you want elections to decide royalty but how many of our elected MP's are black, indian or women for that matter !!!!

Answer 8

The role of royalty in British society is similar to a parasitic organism living inside the body of it's host.

They are an horrendous drain on resources and they do absolutely nothing to make themselves worthwhile. This contrary to all the old waffle about them being tourist attractions - if we needed any more of those the money would be better spent on a zoo or something where the exhibits could be kept under proper control and put on view to the public for a fraction of the cost the royal spongers demand.

The monarchy should be scrapped.

Yesterday.

Answer 9

The British monarchy is a system of government in which a hereditary monarch is the sovereign of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories, and holds the now constitutional position of head of state. According to convention, the Queen's powers are exercised upon the advice of her prime minister. She does however possess certain reserve powers which she may exercise at her own discretion.

In the UK, the Queen (or King, when there is a male monarch) has numerous theoretical personal prerogatives. In practice, however, with the exception of the appointment of a prime minister, which is done with every prime minister, there are few circumstances in modern British government where these could be justifiably exercised; they have rarely been exercised in the last century. These powers could be exercised in an emergency such as a constitutional crisis. The monarch's personal prerogatives are:

- The refusal to dissolve Parliament when requested by the Prime Minister.

- To appoint a Prime Minister of her own choosing.

- The dismissal of a Prime Minister and his Government on the Monarch's own authority.

- The refusal of the Royal Assent.

- The refusal of the "Queen's Consent," where direct monarchical assent is required for a bill affecting, directly or by implication, the prerogative, hereditary revenues—including ultimus haeres, treasure trove, and bona vacantia—or the personal property or interests of the Crown to be heard in Parliament.

It has long been established in the uncodified Constitution of the United Kingdom that political power is ultimately exercised by the Parliament of the United Kingdom, of which the Sovereign is a non-partisan component, along with the House of Lords and the House of Commons, and by the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Thus, as the modern British monarchy is a constitutional one, the Sovereign's role is in practice limited to non-partisan functions (such as being the fount of honour).

In practice, political power is exercised today through Parliament and by the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The sovereign also holds the title of Supreme Governor of the established Church of England. The monarch holds a weekly audience with the Prime Minister, as well as regular audiences with other members of the Cabinet. The monarch may express his or her views, but, as a constitutional ruler, must ultimately accept the Prime Minister's and Cabinet's decisions.

Read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_mon...

Among the powers possessed by the monarch in the United Kingdom under the Royal Prerogative are:

- The appointment and dismissal of ministers

- The dissolution of parliament and the calling of elections

Clemency and pardon

- The award of dignities and honors

- The declaration of war

The declaration of an emergency

- The grant of Charters of Incorporation

- The minting of coinage

- The issue and revocation of passports

- The expulsion of a foreign national from the United Kingdom

- The creation of new common law courts

- The creation of new universities

- The appointment of bishops and archbishops in the Church of England

- The printing of the authorized Church of England version of the Bible

- The publication of all statutes, legislative instruments and Orders-in-Council existing and new

- The exercise of jurisdiction over numerous Royal foundations of all kinds

- The appointment of Royal Commissions and Officers for any purposes

- The choice of the numbering of monarchs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Prero...

In addition to a monarch's constitutional duties, the monarch has an important role to play in public. A national figurehead, the monarch provides a focus for identity, offers recognition of achievement of all kinds, and supports the ideals of public and charitable work.

The monarch acts a focus for national unity and pride by means of regular visits in its country, its other realms, and overseas destinations. The monarch is supported by other members of the Royal Family, who also carry out thousands of visits each year.

The monarch recognises excellence and achievement. This takes place in many ways: through Royal visits which provide a 'seal of approval' to a charity or community; through the award of honours and prizes to outstanding individuals; and through messages sent to those celebrating special birthdays or wedding anniversaries.

The monarch and the Royal Family also play an important part in the public and voluntary sector. Through involvement with hundreds of charities, military units and other organisations, they promote the ideal of service to others.

Answer 10

I agree with Cookie - they symbolise all that is undesirable in society - heredity power and wealth, oppression of women (hereditary priority given to male heirs), religious intolerance (must be C of E Christians), racisim (when can we expect a black, Asian, or Chinese monarch ?), a sickening forelock-tugging sycophantic attitude towards social 'superiors', etc, etc.  At the very least the monarchy should be severely reformed, preferably abolished.  If there are wimps who say that society would collapse without it, then let the monarch be elected; there is historical precedence for that (in Saxon times).  

It's about time we rediscovered the guillotine.....

The only good thing that can be said about it is that some find it entertaining, but surely a national soap opera would be more amusing, and a lot cheaper.

Here's a thought for Americans - is it not true that your head of state represents, constitutionally, a fossilised 18thC Hanoverian monarch, still retaining executive power ?  Interestingly the British constitution has developed significantly from there to a point where, as you say, the monarch has become redundant except in a symbolic sense.  Here the pomp and 'glory' has become fossilised, while the power has been stripped away.

Answer 11

They sponge off the taxpayers and do "Royal duties". I think the monarchy should end when the Queen dies - none of the others have her integrity. Buck House would be the ultimate tourist attraction in London!

Nearvir - when have they ever been to work for any money to buy land/property?

Answer 12

Why does the USA have a President and a First Lady?  As Canadians we are taught American History in school, time you all learned about other countries

Answer 13

I am not being cynical and I will try my damnedest not to be rude,although with George Dubbya Bush as your head of state it will be very difficult not to be.Queen Elizabeth,is our head of state and as yet,is not known to be a confirmed liar as is your president.We hear over here that your president lied his way into office the first time and then elected for a second term as reward for getting away with it the first time.We also heard that his sidekick,d**k (the shooter)Cheyney and his company,Haliburton,were awarded most of the contracts to rebuild Iraq and supply the spare parts and replacements.With $400 a time for hammers,that can be bought for $10 maximum at any hardware store,that is pretty good going or how about $200 for ONE nut and bolt.We over here think of all the tax payers money going to d**k the Shooter and his boss,the oil barron Bush.Don't come on here talking about the smell over here,when the stench from your own cess pit is far worse

Answer 14

What I find amusing is that people seem to think that the Royal Family "sponge" off the taxpayers whereas in actual fact they get their income from the land they own across the UK.

The President of the USA is, in a way, both "king and prime minister". He attends ceremonies and represents his country, and at the same time governs it. The Prime Minister in the UK does these things, but our Monarchy represents the UK too, in ceremonies and diplomatic visits. It's also great for tourism; a little bit of history in the 21st century. And you could also argue that it is vital to our sense of culture and tradition.

Answer 15

The Queen and her inbred moron family are simply there to bleed us dry As they have done for hundreds of years....the sooner we wake up and get rid of them and their hangers on the better.

Answer 16

England has a puppet monarchy. The monarch lives in a bygone age, is told to do by the government and are top of the horrible British class system.

It's time to call a referendum to see whether the commoners are still prepared to accept the conditions under which they live. The majority have too many problems of their own to take time to evaluate the real waste the Royal family actually is.

The French got it right!

Answer 17

the role of the monarchy at the moment is to sit and wait for the British people to realise that democracy does not work. once this happens we will be able to get rid of our useless mps, hopefully before they complete signing over all our law making to Brussels and then regain their rightful position in control of Britain.